ICC rejects Duterte’s challenge to jurisdiction, affirms authority over ‘war on drugs’ crimes
Metro Manila, Philippines - The International Criminal Court (ICC) has rejected former President Rodrigo Duterte’s bid to challenge its jurisdiction over crimes allegedly committed during his bloody “war on drugs,” affirming that it retains authority to prosecute despite the Philippines’ withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2019.
In a 32-page decision dated Oct. 23, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I ruled that Duterte’s arguments had no legal basis and that the court “retains jurisdiction over the alleged crimes committed in the Philippines between 1 November 2011 and 16 March 2019.”
“The Chamber rejects the Defence Challenge with Respect to Jurisdiction and confirms that the Court retains jurisdiction over the alleged crimes committed in the Philippines between 1 November 2011 and 16 March 2019,” the ruling stated.
The decision was a major blow to the Duterte defense, coming just weeks after the ICC denied the former president’s bid for interim release while awaiting the confirmation of charges hearing.
Duterte’s legal team had argued that the ICC no longer had authority to pursue the case because the Philippines was no longer a member of the Court when the investigation was formally authorized in 2021.
The defense also claimed that Article 127(2) of the Rome Statute — which protects cases “already under consideration” before a state’s withdrawal — did not apply to the Prosecutor’s preliminary examination, describing it as “internal, informal, and non-justiciable.”
But the three-judge panel, composed of Judge Iulia Antoanella Motoc, Judge Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou, and Judge María del Socorro Flores Liera, disagreed, calling the defense’s interpretation too narrow.
The court said the “subject-matter of the preliminary examination” into Duterte’s anti-drug campaign was “a matter already under consideration by the Court” when the Philippines’ withdrawal became effective in March 2019.
“The use of the words ‘any matter’ does not limit this phrase to any specific phase of the proceedings,” the Chamber wrote.
“Had any such limitation been intended, the provision would instead have used a word such as ‘trial’ or ‘investigation’ so as to narrow its application,” it said.
The judges said the withdrawal “shall not prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective,” citing Article 127(2) of the Statute.
The ruling reaffirmed the principle that a state cannot evade ICC jurisdiction simply by withdrawing after alleged crimes have been committed.
The Chamber emphasized that the Philippines, as a State Party from 2011 to 2019, was bound by the Statute’s obligations during that period.
“Article 127(2) results in the jurisdiction of the Court continuing over any such matter,” the decision said. “States cannot avoid accountability for crimes under the Statute by withdrawing once the alleged conduct has occurred.”
The ICC authorized an investigation into the Philippines in 2021, focusing on thousands of extrajudicial killings that occurred under Duterte’s anti-drug campaign from 2016 to 2019.
Duterte was arrested earlier this year and made his first appearance before the Court in March.
The Chamber has yet to decide on Duterte’s fitness to stand trial, after his lawyers filed a motion seeking to indefinitely adjourn proceedings on medical grounds.
